Re: Seeking advice on a purchase

[Peter Cole]

Al Vazquez wrote:

> A local custom bike shop near me has a vintage Trek road bike with a
> hand-made frame of Reynolds 531 steel tubing. The shop itself is very
> personal and I know for the life of the bike the shop would support my
> needs. The hardware is older, with the shifters on the bike frame
> instead of the handle bars. The bike is selling for $500.

> Is it a wise purchase? Am I paying more for style and vintage than I
> am for quality? Would I be better off with a new bike for the same
> price? What other considerations should I be making? I appreciate any
> advice I can get!

It sounds a bit steep, but that's difficult to say without knowing
exactly what it is. I have bought a few (pristine) 80's bikes, I've paid
between $50-200.

 

[Al Vazquez]

On Mar 4, 8:48 am, Peter Cole <[email protected]> wrote:
> Al Vazquez wrote:
> > A local custom bike shop near me has a vintage Trek road bike with a
> > hand-made frame of Reynolds 531 steel tubing. The shop itself is very
> > personal and I know for the life of the bike the shop would support my
> > needs. The hardware is older, with the shifters on the bike frame
> > instead of the handle bars. The bike is selling for $500.
> > Is it a wise purchase? Am I paying more for style and vintage than I
> > am for quality? Would I be better off with a new bike for the same
> > price? What other considerations should I be making? I appreciate any
> > advice I can get!
>
> It sounds a bit steep, but that's difficult to say without knowing
> exactly what it is. I have bought a few (pristine) 80's bikes, I've paid
> between $50-200.

Thanks for all the advice so far.

When I found the Trek, the shop keep was lauding the merits of older
gear and older frames, claiming he rides older stuff because he likes
it better. He said that steel absorbs impact while newer materials
like aluminum and carbon fiber don't, but that the problem with steel
is weight. The fact that the bike was made of Reynolds 531 was
supposed to make up for that fact because the bike is very light. None
of the parts are rusted or ill-maintained. When I road it, aside from
the saddle being a bit harder then I'm used to, it felt great.

But the $500 price tag was bothering me, too. How much of what he said
has merit?

Another question I have is size. The bike fit me perfectly, and it was
a 54cm frame. My friend who's 4 inches taller than me got a 51cm frame
and I can barely keep my balance standing over the seat. Is the 54cm
measurement wrong? Does the 80's 54cm bike have smaller tires than the
brand new 51cm? It's got me completely baffled about bike sizes.

Thanks again for your help so far. A handful more test rides and some
more information and I should be the proud owner of a bike that works
for me.

--
Al

 

[SMS]

Al Vazquez wrote:

> But the $500 price tag was bothering me, too. How much of what he said
> has merit?

I've seen vintage bicycles like that selling on craigslist for very high
prices, simply because to get the equivalent quality bicycle new would
be over $1000. I don't know if the seller actually got as much as they
wanted.

Certainly the geometry and frame quality of the older vintage bicycle
will be better than most of what you would pay $500 for these days.
However the components will all be old and not have all the features of
a modern bicycle, i.e. the lack of bar-end shifters or brifters.

> Another question I have is size. The bike fit me perfectly, and it was
> a 54cm frame. My friend who's 4 inches taller than me got a 51cm frame
> and I can barely keep my balance standing over the seat. Is the 54cm
> measurement wrong? Does the 80's 54cm bike have smaller tires than the
> brand new 51cm? It's got me completely baffled about bike sizes.

Sizes are not absolute, the frame geometry matters a lot between
manufacturers and models.

>
> Thanks again for your help so far. A handful more test rides and some
> more information and I should be the proud owner of a bike that works
> for me.

$500 may not buy you much of a new road bike these days.

 

[Pat]

>
> $500 may not buy you much of a new road bike these days.

I saw a Schwinn in Sam's Club today for $215. I don't know much about it
because they just left the bikes in the boxes! However, Al could do some
homework and find out more and he'd be getting a bike with new technology.

Pat in TX

 

[Peter Cole]

Al Vazquez wrote:
> On Mar 4, 8:48 am, Peter Cole <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Al Vazquez wrote:
>>> A local custom bike shop near me has a vintage Trek road bike with a
>>> hand-made frame of Reynolds 531 steel tubing. The shop itself is very
>>> personal and I know for the life of the bike the shop would support my
>>> needs. The hardware is older, with the shifters on the bike frame
>>> instead of the handle bars. The bike is selling for $500.
>>> Is it a wise purchase? Am I paying more for style and vintage than I
>>> am for quality? Would I be better off with a new bike for the same
>>> price? What other considerations should I be making? I appreciate any
>>> advice I can get!
>> It sounds a bit steep, but that's difficult to say without knowing
>> exactly what it is. I have bought a few (pristine) 80's bikes, I've paid
>> between $50-200.
>
> Thanks for all the advice so far.
>
> When I found the Trek, the shop keep was lauding the merits of older
> gear and older frames, claiming he rides older stuff because he likes
> it better. He said that steel absorbs impact while newer materials
> like aluminum and carbon fiber don't, but that the problem with steel
> is weight. The fact that the bike was made of Reynolds 531 was
> supposed to make up for that fact because the bike is very light. None
> of the parts are rusted or ill-maintained. When I road it, aside from
> the saddle being a bit harder then I'm used to, it felt great.
>
> But the $500 price tag was bothering me, too. How much of what he said
> has merit?
>

The stuff about frame materials is pretty much a religious attitude.
Vintage bikes may appeal to some aesthetically, but there's no other
advantage. He may like retro stuff, but you may not. Personally, I have
bought a few nice 80's bikes with the intention of riding them "as is",
but was never able to. I find the new components much nicer. A new
hybrid might be better suited to your needs, for about the same money.
Check out EBay prices on retro bikes (fetching, not asking prices) to
get a better feel.


> Another question I have is size. The bike fit me perfectly, and it was
> a 54cm frame. My friend who's 4 inches taller than me got a 51cm frame
> and I can barely keep my balance standing over the seat. Is the 54cm
> measurement wrong? Does the 80's 54cm bike have smaller tires than the
> brand new 51cm? It's got me completely baffled about bike sizes.

Bike fitting is tricky business. If you're really in the dark about it
the only way is to get help from a competent shop. Both Sheldon Brown
and Peter White (among many others) have some bike fitting info on the
web, a little Googling and reading should better prepare you with the
fundamentals.